法理天空 用精取宏——评《法理学:法律哲学与法律方法》

《法理学:法律哲学与法律方法》一书运用整体论的方法,描述了西方从古希腊到二十世纪七十年代的各种法哲学流派的思想、理论和主义,论证了法律是秩序与正义的综合体,探讨了解决法律问题的方法论,从而完整地构建了综合法理学体系。     

社会和谐、社会公平与反垄断——论和谐社会的公共政策取向

社会发展的不均衡以及由此引发的社会矛盾,使和谐社会的构建变得不仅必要而且十分迫切。本文作者认为,社会和谐与社会公平作为政府所追求的两大目标,具有不同的价值取向,和谐社会应该以社会公平为基础和前提,而由于机会自由是社会公平的核心,垄断又是机会自由的天敌,所以,旨在构建和谐社会的努力就应该以保障机会自由,消除任何歧视性政策,反对任何形式的垄断为公共政策的依归和目标导向。     

建构简易程序中的被告人参与模式

创设刑事简易程序是当今世界各国刑事诉讼发展的趋势。我国刑事诉讼法设计的简易程序没有保障被告人最低限度的公正标准,这导致简易程序的适用比例不高,也与设立简易程序的初衷不相符。建立被告人程序参与模式以扩大简易程序的适用,都应以最低限度的公正标准为基础来分析和解决。     

从恢复性司法论我国“和解制度的刑事化”

“恢复性司法”是西方国家的一项刑事司法制度,它的价值在于通过犯罪人、被害人及其他主体之间积极主动的沟通和交流,让犯罪人有机会通过积极的、负责任的行为尽快改过自新、融入社会,同时使得被害人因犯罪所造成的物质、精神损失得到有效的补偿,使被害人受犯罪影响的生活能够尽快地恢复常态,最大限度地保护被害人的合法权益。我国应借鉴其合理之处,构建我国的刑事和解制度。     

树立正确的执法理念 提高执法水平

当前公安执法工作在打击犯罪过程中取得了显著成效,但同时还存在着一些重实体、轻程序,重尽快破案、轻依法办案等突出问题,纠其原因,除了制度、法规缺乏完善的客观原因外,主要是执法思想不端正。因此,树立正确的执法理念,对于依法办案,提高执法水平具有重要意义。     

PROFILING AND POLICE LEGITIMACY: PROCEDURAL JUSTICE,ATTRIBUTIONS OF MOTIVE,AND ACCEPTANCE OF POLICE AUTHORITY*

This paper reports the results of four studies that investigate racial profiling as an attribution about police motives. Each study explores, first, the types of police behavior that heighten or lessen the occurrence of profiling attributions and, second, the consequences of such attributions. Results support prior studies in finding that judgments about whether the police are profiling are associated with the level of public support for the police. The studies then extend the analysis of subjective profiling judgments by examining their antecedents. The findings support the procedural justice hypothesis that the fairness with which the police exercise their authority influences whether members of the public view the police as profiling.     

深入开展社会主义法治理念教育做到“五个深刻理解”和“五个牢固树立”

要深刻理解依法治国、执法为民、公平正义、服务大局、党的领导等社会主义法治理念的主要内容,牢固树立法律面前人人平等、维护法律权威、严格依法办事的意识,为人民执法、靠人民执法、尊重和保障人权的意识,合理合法、平等对待、及时高效、程序公正的意识,为经济社会发展服务的意识,党对公安工作绝对领导的意识。     

Levinas and the possibility of justice

I consider the question of whether critical legal theory can amount to more than an obstructive exercise and point to an alternative approach to the problem of institutional justice. I am not trying to redeem critical legal theory neither do I attempt to exonerate it from the charge of obstruction or as Drucilla Cornell terms it, negative dialectics. However, I share to some lesser degree the concern that it ought to be possible to offer more than the exposure of camouflaged injustice. By camouflaged I mean that branch of jurisprudence, positivist in outlook and tonality that maintains and defends the violation of the other as an integral and necessary aspect of law and further argues that as such it is entirely ethical. I examine a number of different perspectives to this seemingly impossible challenge. Borrowing from and adapting their theses I then go on to suggest my own solution for applying alterity to juridical encounters with the Other.Dr. Amanda Loumansky is a Sessional Lecturer at the Faculty of Continuing Education, Birkbeck College, University of London, London, UK     

Lay-Perspectives on Criminal Deviance,Goals of Punishment,and Punitivity

Empirical studies corroborate a relatively close relation between goals of sentencing and punitiveness. However, it is not clear what aspects of sentencing goals motivate harsh punishment. This study analyzes the structure of sentencing goals and scrutinizes in particular whether the idea of retribution is associated with punitiveness, or whether punishment considerations from a societal perspective (macrolevel) are the source of more punitive responses. A questionnaire was mailed to a random sample drawn in Bern, Switzerland. A total of 357 persons responded to items measuring constructs including goals of sentencing, punitiveness, target of justice considerations, and perceived threat to society, after reading one of three short stories about specific crimes (fraud, physical injury, assault). Results of this study reveal a two-dimensional structure of sentencing goals. One dimension represents readiness to punish and exclude the offender socially. The other dimension refers to concerns of the victim versus the needs of the society as a whole. The analysis provides a new interpretation of sentencing goals.     

死刑复核程序中被告人的诉讼权利问题

死刑复核程序中被告人应当享有充分的诉讼权利,这是肯定死刑复核程序的诉讼属性、体现被告人的程序主体地位、保障死刑判决正确适用、提高死刑判决可接受性的必然要求;以国际公约的相关规定为参照,我国死刑复核程序被告人的诉讼权利处于极度匮乏状态因而亟需完善,一方面应确保被告人享有普通案件审判程序中的诉讼权利除非其自行放弃,另一方面应对被告人予以特殊的保护。具体而言应当赋予被告人关于死刑复核程序审理方式的选择权、强制辩护权、反对强迫自证其罪权、无罪推定权、免受双重危险权、申请赦免、减刑权等诉讼权利,并建立死刑延期执行制度,为被告人穷尽救济手段提供必要时间保障